About your Search

20121222
20121230
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9
of slavery? well, last week the federal government as it does, you know, once or twice a year came out with its latest figures on birthrights. and in particular on one i'm going to point to is the illegitimacy rate or out-of-wedlock births. here they are. 72.3% of african-americans now are born out of wedlock. 72.3%. american indians, 66.2%. latinos, it's 53.3%. for whites it's still pretty high, but it's 29.1 percent. and for asians it's 17.2%. so in other words, seven out of ten, six out of ten, five out of ten for blacks, american end yangs and latinos. these are the so-called underrepresented minorities that get racial preferences. and then fewer than three out of ten and fewer than two out of ten for whites and aiz items -- asians, people who are typically discriminated against. it is no accident that these figures line up quite well with how well different groups are doing not only in terms of education, but in terms of crime and, you know, whatever social indicator you want. that is the real problem. and, of course, that is not going to be fixed by racial preferences and univers
boundary to implement. the order required the government to obtain a warrant and show probable cause. these are the same basic commonsense protections we've had in place for other types of searches. this development required individualized and particular orders from the fisa court to conduct investigations. let's fast forward to 2001. president bush decided in secret to authorize the national security agency to start a new program of warrantless surveillance inside the united states. this is in complete contravention of the fourth amendment and complete contravention of the law at that time. as i'm sure and many of my colleagues will certainly recall this was revealed to the american public four years later when it was reported in "the new york times" in 2005. and in response after years of back and forth contentious debate, congress passed the fisa amendments act, the bill that we are considering on this floor today. we're considering a reauthorization. this law gave the government new surveillance authorities, but it also included a sunset provision to ensure that congress ex
for circumstances when the government searches through its database of captured communications looking for information on individual american citizens. otherwise, by means of these so-called backdoor searches, the government may conduct significant warrantless surveillance of american persons. i believe this current practice is inconsistent with core fourth amendment privacy protections and needs to be reformed. during consideration of fisa in the judiciary committee, senator durbin and i introduced a bipartisan amendment to address this very problem. the language of our amendment is identical to that offered by senators wyden and udall during consideration of fisa by the select committee on intelligence. the amendment clarifies that section 702 does not permit the government to search its data base of fisa materials to identify communications of a particular united states person. in effect, it would require the government to obtain a warrant before performing such queries involving an american person's communications. the amendment is limited in scope. it excludes from the warrant req
the longstanding recommendation of the government accountability office that the department perform a strategic review that they carry at the necessary security measures that the diplomats abroad and ensure that all necessary actions are present to prevent a recurrence. i know there will be an attempt to shift the responsibility for the tragedy to a shortage of resources. requests for more money are a familiar refrain in the state department reports. but budgetary constraints or not a factor in the department's failure to recognize the threats and adequately respond to this situation in benghazi that is and about misplaced priorities. if this department intends to blame its long string of failures on an adequate funding, then perhaps it should take a closer look at the money that is being lavished on the global climate change, colin marie diplomacy programs another fever project. this money could have been used for providing diplomatic security including hiring additional personnel and providing them with adequate equipment and training. this report and this hearing are just the beginning of ou
. this morning they approve and extension of the farm intelligence v it allows the government to continue intercepting overseas communication. it extends legal immunity phone companies that help the government wiretap the domestic phone calls. president obama plans to sign the bill. when the senate is back we are expecting senators to continued work on the $60 billion hurricane sandy relief package. negotiations continue on avoiding the so-called fiscal cliff. both parties head to the white house today to discuss the fiscal cliff with the president. it's at 3:00 p.m. eastern in the oval office. senate in recess until 2:00 p.m. eastern when the senate reconveneses, live coverage here on c-span2. >>> and right now on c-span2 a conversation with nebraska senator ben nelson who is retiring after two terms. >>> retiring senator nebraska ben tell me sop. years that began with the 2003 recount and reended with re-election of president obama. if you could think of the adjective to describe these years what would it be? >> clearly interesting. challenging. sometimes totally frustrating. but also f
the cultural revolution. why? he says, because then you knew the government was the enemy, now you're not sure. [laughter] so i said you already want to bring up about a democratic system. they said yes. i'm not a law teacher. so after they say how much they're all favored the market, i said that's a very interesting question, point. i favorite. i favorite, but i've noticed from what i've read that there are millions of people in china who make just a few dollars a day. and they are on the own land and they're not very rich really. and you have quite a lot of money i gather. i was told. and suppose they also look, we are in the majority, and justice money down you. we're going to take it all away from you and give it to us. and the one who started this, i said to you favor that? if that's the result. he said i am in favor of democracy, but maybe not right now. [laughter] so you see, it's like a tiger by the tail. so you start looking at the other side, and they are afraid of a certain kind of chaos or of a certain kind of, and so somehow you have to, you have to, now that, that is partly, that
with the government's first position on guantanamo bay was no-man's land they already rented from cuba the majority was to the extent that the law exists in guantanamo bay. there is no other power, certainly castro is not controlling what was happening there. so, to the government said habeas corpus doesn't extend to guantanamo bay so for that purpose of this part of the usa and a follow on cases in in the lower court so all of the returns are in. >> the next question is 1i know you never get. what is your view of the nomination process that comes from fort lewis and how might it be improved to make it less frustrating were demeaning to? >> it wasn't always the way it has been for the nominations. it would include our chief justice, justice alito, justice so why -- sotomayor and justice kagan. people decided to go along party lines. contrast that with the way that it was when i was nominated in 1993 in the justice breyer the following year. my biggest supporter of the senate judiciary committee was senator orrin hatch and he confirmed that and he wrote an autobiography in which he takes great pride
be a violation of law. here's the key point to understand about incidental collection: although the government may, under the right circumstances, be authorized to retain the communication between known terrorists and presumptive u.s. person or persons, including the phone number he relayed to the terrorist, the government cannot place the united states number on surveillance and start collecting the calls to and fro the u.s. number without first obtaining a court order or a warrant. to do so would be to target a united states person, which i'll explain is reverse targeting. can the government use section 702 to target a u.s. person? this is important. and the answer is no. the law specifically prevents direct collection against u.s. persons. this prohibition is codified in 702-b which states that the section may not be used -- and i quote -- "to intentionally target any person known at the time of acquisition to be located in the united states or to intentionally target a united states person reasonably believed to be located inside the united states." is there a loophole or back door that al
of homeowners, small business and governments not going ahead with the desperate repair that we in new york need and the whole national economy since we're a about 10% of the national economy. so it's strongly urged that the amendment, good-intentioned though it is, be defeated. mr. coats: could i ask unanimous consent for 15 seconds to respond 0 to my colleague? stir officer is there objection? without objection. mr. coats: let me just say that we simply allowing three months for the congress of the united states, representative of the taxpayers' dollars, to assess, document, and justify additional expenditures that go beyond emergency needs. that's what this is all about. mr. cochran: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that my remarks be printed at this point in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. the question is on amendment 3391. a senator: i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to. the clerk will call the roll. vote: the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or wishing to change
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9